Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Sustainability Solutions Group
Montreal: 837 rue Guilford, Montreal, QuebecH2J 1P1 t. (514) 504.4011Nova Scotia: 11 Alex Cox Rd, Tatamagouche, Nova Scotia B0K 1V0 t. (902) 657.2532British Columbia: #109-5 West Pender StreetVancouver V6B 1R3 t. (604) 484.4504
Illustrations by Steve Christian.
Steve is a designer by trade whose wit and skilled pen have also lent him to illustrative projects like this year's sustainability assessment. He is the sole proprietor of Second Nature Designs and has focused primarily on custom residential and commercial projects located on the Sunshine Coast of British Columbia. Steve enjoys the creative design process while helping to communicate, develop and implement shared ideas through drawing.
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1Mission 1
METHODOLOGY 3About this report 3Who’s included 3Assessment framework and indicators 3Data 3Sources of error 3
ORGANISATIONAL PROFILE 5Vision 5Mission 5Service offerings 5Incorporation classification 5Associations 5Organisation and decision-making 5
SSG AT WORK 7Members 7Associate members 7Finances 8 SSG clients and projects 8
SECTION ONE: TOWARD CO-OPERATION, COLLABORATION & COMMUNITY 10Community support fund 10Projects engaging more than 1 SSG member 11Collaborative work 11SSG presentations 11Repeat clients 11Discussion and analysis 11
SECTION TWO: TOWARD HEALTHY WORKPLACE, HEALTHY LIVES 13Health care benefits 13Worker members’ allocation of hours 13 Work-personal life balance 14Overall worker happiness 14Discussion and analysis 15
SECTION THREE: TOWARD DIVERSITY, EQUITY, JUSTICE 16
SECTION FOUR: TOWARD ECOLOGICAL SUSTAINABILITY 17Total square metres of new LEED and green/sustainable building consulting projects 17Total kilometres traveled, by mode of transportation 18Greenhouse gas emissions by mode of transportation 18Percentage of GHG emissions that have been carbon taxed 19Worker members’ ecological footprint 19Discussion and analysis 19
CONCLUSIONS 20
APPENDIX 1: INDICATOR OVERVIEW [email protected]
Mission
Sustainability Solutions Group (SSG) is a worker co-operative that
nurtures and embodies a holistic understanding of sustainability
and works with clients and collaborators to meaningfully integrate
social, ecological and economic practices in their organisations
and work.
SSG believes that a transparent, comprehensive, integrated
and far-sighted approach to planning and decision making is
the best way to achieve its goals. By allowing SSG to reflect
on its ecological, social and economical impacts, the annual
sustainability assessment is an important tool that informs this
process. Reporting on its activities and practices also allows
SSG to share its successes and challenges with clients, partners,
collaborators, and the broader community. A few highlights for
the 2008 reporting period include:
• Full-time equivalents (FTE’s) fell slightly from 3.97 in 2007 to
3.8 in 2008.
• Total revzenues rose from $272,041 in 2007 to $274,296 in
2008.
• The number of projects involving SSG fell from 36 in 2007 to 26
in 2008, a decrease of over 25%.
• On a scale of one to ten, with ten being perfect, SSG worker
members overall work-life balance increased from 5 in 2007 to
6.7 in 2008.
• On the same scale, overall happiness for SSG worker members
also increased, going from 6.5 in 2007 to 7.9 in 2008.
• For the third year in a row, SSG’s greenhouse gas emissions
have been reduced; worker members traveled 17,100 km less
in 2008 than in 2007 and tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents
per FTE’s also decreased from 3.7 in 2007 to 3.3 in 2008.
• SSG did not meet their 10% donations target of total contract
revenues to the Community Support Fund. Having achieved
4.05% in 2008, SSG plans on making the appropriate retroactive
donations in 2009 so as to comply with its donations policy.
• Many changes took place in the lives of worker members: one
founding worker member left SSG to pursue other endeavors,
one benefited from SSG’s new parental leave policy while two
others have enrolled in European masters programs.
• Strategic directions established in 2007 that translated into
action during 2008 include: worker members moving to salary
pay, the completion of a human resources strategy and the
establishment of clear communication channels with associate
members. SSG now issues the Hot Dispatches to Associate
Members (the Hot D.A.M. publication) on a quarterly basis
as a way to provide organisational updates, feature ongoing
projects and share ideas.
• As SSG continues to evolve, strategic directions for 2009
include: the establishment of a think tank, the creation of hubs
(creative community workspaces) in the Victoria, Montreal and
Vancouver areas and develop innovative relationships and
strategies for greater impact in terms of financial contribution
relating to SSG’s donation policy.
• SSG has been initiating discussions on climate change in the
cooperative sector. European cooperatives have articulated
three steps: measure organisational emissions; engage
membership and political advocacy. SSG members have been
encouraging a similar approach in Canada. An initial meeting
was held at the 2009 AGM of the Canadian Cooperative
Association with representatives from the Cooperators, Vancity,
Mountain Equipment Cooperative, Coop Atlantic, Federated
Cooperative and a number of credit unions as a first step in
developing an action plan.
Executive Summary
At SSG, solutions for a better world start with us: Understanding the way we do
business and the impacts we have in doing so is
key to improving our performance in all aspects
of our operations.
To assess progress towards its objectives, SSG reports on the
ecological, social and economical dimensions of its operations.
SSG considers these elements as the three interconnected pillars
of sustainability; measuring and reporting on them enables SSG
to evaluate, manage and improve its performance.
About this Report
This report covers the period from the 1st of January 2008 to the
31st of December 2008. When compared to previous reports,
the 2008 report is meant to be a shorter, less intensive version of
SSG’s annual sustainability assessment. This approach reflects
SSG’s desire to allocate complete resources to this process
every few years as opposed to every year. In doing so, SSG’s
objective is to continue to report, on a yearly basis, the highlights
of its operations while allowing its members to allocate more
time and energy to consulting-related projects and contracts.
In preparing for this “mini-assessment”, SSG worker members
worked together to select the indicators included in this report.
Consequently, the 2008 report focuses largely on SSGs’
operations and its worker members, and puts less emphasis on
clients and associate members. While you will find the specifics
of this year’s omissions outlined below, it is important to point
out that although SSG considers this sustainability assessment
report to be a “scaled-down” version, it is no less valuable to SSG.
As with previous assessments, SSG is committed to using these
results to guide future decision-making and strategic planning.
Who’s Included
At the very beginning of 2008, one of the associate members took
on close to a full-time workload with SSG; in September 2008,
another associate member joined SSG and quickly became
similarly involved with the co-op. Because the considerable
contribution of these two associate members included a range of
tasks as diverse and involved as that of SSG worker members,
and out of the desire to best reflect the activities of the co-op,
these two associate members are accounted, in this report,
as worker members. In this 2008 Sustainability Assessment,
the term “worker member” therefore designates four worker
members (Yuill Herbert, Lindsay Cole, Melissa Garcia-Lamarca,
and Geneva Guerin) and the two associate members mentioned
above (Jeremy Murphy and Rebecca Foon). The term “associate
member” refers to the other associate members involved with
SSG for the reporting period.
Assessment Framework and Indicators
In this fourth report, three quarters of the 2007 assessment
framework categories were retained: Section three “Toward
diversity, equity and justice” was not included. In contrast to
previous assessments, no client and partner feedback surveys
were distributed, and therefore, the two related indicators are
excluded. Appendix I provides a list of all the indicators used by
SSG in previous years for its sustainability reports.
Data
To obtain worker-member input, qualitative data for this report
was collected from two on-line surveys. Quantitative data was
obtained by reviewing internal records.
Sources of Error
Ongoing, uncontrollable and unquantifiable issues may include
lack of consistency in how each worker member tracks data and
data processing errors.
Methodology
Hours Management System
In October 2008, SSG introduced a new payroll
and hours management system. This new
system has helped facilitate record keeping
by, for example, further standardizing the time
tracking process. To further increase its tracking
efficiency, SSG is currently working towards
integrating work related travel and greenhouse
gas emissions into this customizable
management tool.
“You can’t manage what you don’t measure.” -Peter Drucker
Vision
SSG envisions a just, happy and healthy world where the well-
being of one is connected to and reliant upon the well-being of
all.
Mission
SSG is an innovative Canadian worker co-operative that nurtures
and embodies a holistic understanding of sustainability and
works with clients and collaborators to meaningfully integrate
social, ecological and economic practices in their organisations
and work.
SSG’s work is guided by three elements:
• Ensuring work has integrity, is leading edge, and is of
high quality;
• Building capacity within the organisations with which
we work; and
• Creating tools and processes that are inclusive and
innovative.
Service Offerings
Green and Sustainable Buildings: Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design (LEED) consulting and project
management, integrated design process (IDP) facilitation and
training and operations planning.
Organisational Sustainability: Multistakeholder approaches,
indicator development, measurement and assessment of
impacts, strategy development and implementation planning,
sustainability reporting, green and sustainable operations
planning, policy development and creation of sustainability
management systems.
Climate Change Research and Mitigation: Policy research, micro-
generation, carbon offsetting, land use planning, organisational
greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts, energy planning, and building
related energy use.
Food Security: Policy development, land use planning, facilitation
and networking, alternative models of land tenure, business
planning and market development, indicator development and
reporting on food and health issues.
Sustainable Communities: Integrated community sustainability
planning (ICSP), community energy planning, co-op and social
enterprise development, affordable housing research and
development, community economic development, facilitation,
research and policy development, and sustainability indicator
development and reporting.
Incorporation Classification
SSG is federally incorporated as a worker’s co-operative
Associations
Canadian Workers Co-operative Federation (CWCF)
British Columbia Co-operative Association
Canada Green Building Council
Climate Action Network (Can-net)
Organisation and Decision-Making
SSG has a flat, horizontal structure, meaning that all worker
members earn the same salary and share the responsibility of
running the co-op. Consensus based decision-making is used
for governance and operations.
Organisational Profile
SSG Members’ ValuesWe want to make a difference.•
We believe that society needs better ways to do •business.We want meaningful lives and work.•
We believe in fairness and respect to those present •today and to future generations.We want to increase the sustainability of communities, •to make the world more sustainable and equitable.We believe that we have a responsibility to do our very •best.We want to have a positive impact, to address the root •causes of societal problems.
Members
In the lives of most SSG worker members, 2008 was a year of
change. While 2007 ended with 5 active worker members, 2008
began with 4 active worker members as one worker member left
SSG to pursue other endeavors. Another worker member took
parental leave from June to September while two others scaled
back their work loads in the fall as they were each beginning
masters programs in Europe. As mentioned previously in the
Methodology Section, one associate member took on a full
workload in January 2008, with another associate member doing
so in the fall.
On average, SSG had 3.8 full-time equivalents (FTE’s), a small
decrease compared to 2007 (3.97 FTE’s). The simultaneous
scaling back of WM hours and the increase in hours for AM’s
partly explains why the number of FTE’s essentially stayed the
same.
Associate Members
SSG aims to be an inclusive organisation with impacts that reach
beyond the capacity of our worker members. The associate
member arrangement allows individuals to work with SSG on a
part-time basis, and gives SSG a pool of colleagues that can be
drawn upon with the ebb and flow of work. Associated Members
are chosen for their skills, location, capacity, diversity and co-
operative ethic.
SSG at Work
Thoughts from an overseas worker member: “I still marvel at how excited I am about SSG, even from France. In late 2007, I decided that it was time for a little gear shifting in my life and I was keen to further develop my technical competencies in sustainable construction. After finding an aptly titled Masters in Architecture and Sustainable Development split between Switzerland and France, the wheels were set in motion for my professional (and personal) development break, which was to last seven months. The plan was to return and write my thesis in Montreal at the end of classes in December of 2008, then resume work part time with SSG while I wrote my thesis in the first half of 2009. As life tends to do, a change of plans got in the way. I decided to continue in France for my thesis research and writing while working part time in the newly developing sustainable construction industry. Though my intent is to return to Canada once my thesis has been successfully defended in the fall of 2009, there may also be interesting professional opportunities that involve knowledge transfer from what I have learned with SSG, over to France. As of yet, still unclear but the story is fast unraveling.
Throughout all of this, my ideas, needs and plans were always accepted as starting points for discussions with my SSG colleagues. SSG is relentlessly adapting to the needs of its members, even during times when they are very challenging. I am now on the appreciative end of this, having thrown a few curveballs that require some significant adapting to. Though it is not easy to adapt to changing member needs, it is what we do and I can’t help but feel incredibly lucky and grateful to be part of such an open minded and nurturing organisation. Big and sincere thanks to all of my colleagues.”
5: # of Associate Members (AM’s)
7664.25: hrs worked by all SSG members
370: hrs worked by AM’s
4.8: % of hours contributed by AM’s
2005 2006 2007 2008
Organisational Indicators
1. Total number of projects 7 30 36 262. Number of clients 3 19 23 243. Number of associate members 0 3 8 54. Total full-time equivalents (FTE’s) 0.3 2.72 2.97 3.8
Financial Indicators 1. Total revenue $66,410.00 $203,341.00 $272,041.00 $274,296.062. Total expenses $58,514.00 $163,185.00 $194,497.00 $271,296.643. Net Income -$7,896.00 $33,081.00 $27,272.00 -$7,836.904. Grants $26,225.00 $45,705.00 $5,579.00 $10,344.00
Wa$ted (Dicovery Chanel) On behalf of Bioregional and working with the Global Footprint Network, SSG developed the methodology, completed the audits and reviewed the scripts for the first and second seasons of Wa$ted (PlanetGreen, Discovery Chanel). Here is the description of the show:
“Think that in order to go green, the changes to your lifestyle must be extreme? Think again! This eye-opening half-hour reality series makes shrinking your ecological footprint appealing and virtually effortless. What’s an ecological footprint? It’s a way of describing the scope of the damage that each household does to the planet, and energetic environmentalist Annabelle Gurwitch (from TBS’s “Dinner and a Movie”) and her charming conservationist co-host Holter Graham are out to shrink the ecological shoe size of every man, woman and child in America.
Featured households are incentivized with a challenge to adhere to simple earth-saving suggestions as strictly as possible for three weeks. In a follow-up meeting with Annabelle and Holter, the households (who range from festive frat boys to doting doggy daddies) are again audited and asked to review their successes and failures. Each household’s 21 days of results are then tabulated into the estimated savings that going green for the entire year would bring, which is awarded as a cash prize.”
Finances
Chart 1 shows SSG’s financial indicators for 2008, including
total revenue, total expenses, revenue generated from grants
and net income (what remains after subtracting the costs-
namely business depreciation, interest and taxes from SSG’s
revenues).
SSG Clients and Projects
The number of clients rose from 23 in 2007 to 24 in 2008. Billable
contracts decreased by 27.8%, from 36 in 2007 to 26 in 2008.
Organizational indicators are shown in Chart 2. To make its
services available to a variety of organisations, SSG continued
to offer sliding scale rates to clients in 2008.
-50000
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
2005 2006 2007 2008
1.2.
3.
4.
1. Total revenue
2. Total expenses
3. Grants
4. Net income
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1.
4.3.
2.
200820062005 2007
1. Total number of projects
2. Number of clients
3. Number of active Associate Members
4. Total full-time equivalents (FTEs)
Chart 1: Financial indicators
Chart 2: Organizational indicators
2005 2006 2007 2008
1. % of dollar amount of revenue to community support fund 10% 10% 10.6%, $28,335
4.05%, $11,100
2. % of project hours worked engaging more than one worker-member 0 74% 69% Internal collaboration on 15 projects, actual hours are N/A
3. % of collaborative projects with other individuals/firms 12.50% 12% 30.50% 11.54%4. Number of research projects initiated - 1 1 05. Number of SSG presentations per full-time equivalent 0.2 2.6 3 3.956. % of worker members responding that SSG's work is making a posi-tive difference
100% 100% 87.5% Not Surveyed
7. % of clients/allies responding that SSG's work is making a positive difference
70% 100% 100% Not surveyed
8. Average rate of clients and partner satisfaction - 82% 74% Not surveyed
Section One: Toward co-operation, collaboration & community
Chart 4: Co-operation, collaboration and community indicators
9500: $ donation contributed by Worker Members
1600: $ donation by Associate Members
0
20
40
60
80
100
1.
3.
9.
2.
8.
6.
7.
2005 2006 2007 2008
1. % of revenue to community support fund
2. % of project hours worked engaging more than one
worker-member
3. % of collaborative projects with other individuals/firms
6. % of worker-members responding that SSG’s work
is making a positive difference
7. % of clients/allies responding that SSG's work
is making a positive difference
8. Average rate of client and partner satisfaction
9. % of clients that rehired or engaged SSG on another project
Chart 3: Toward co-operation, collaboration and community
SSG actively seeks opportunities to work with, support or
inspire action and progress by other like-minded individuals
and organisations. SSG therefore contributes its expertise to
various collaborative projects and advocacy initiatives. SSG
also supports grassroot community groups through reduced
consulting rates and financial donations. Chart 3 summarizes
SSG’s internal and external collaboration. Each surveyed
indicator is outlined in further detail below and the last sub-
section provides discussion and analysis of section 1.
In order to be more strategic in its approach to donations,
SSG has further developed its donation process: in 2008, one
Worker Member for each quarter was responsible for selecting
a donation theme to be submitted to other worker members for
approval. This allows each member, on a rotational basis, to
dedicate more time to researching donations opportunities that
fit his or her personal interests. Because the discussion of how
to best support community activism is ongoing, this new format
provides a more formal opportunity for members to manifest
their diverse views regarding donation strategies and priorities.
Community Support Fund
In 2008, SSG contributed $11,100, or 4.05% of its total contract
revenue to the Community Support Fund, consequently not
achieving, for the first year, its 10% donations policy.
Donations were made only for the first two 2008 quarters due
to limited cash-flow caused by the temporary shortage of full-
time worker members. SSG does intend to make donations
totaling the 2008 10% target and is currently in the process of
developing a strategy to do so.
Projects engaging more than one SSG member
SSG worker members seek to work together on billable contracts;
this allows them to enrich the quality of the services offered by
SSG and results in a dynamic approach, increased learning, and
fun. In 2008, 58% of projects engaged more than one worker
member, the same percentage that was recorded in 2007.
Collaborative Work
Collaboration with other companies or organisations on given
projects decreased from 30.5 % in 2007 to 11.54% in 2008.
In 2008, SSG worked with ten contractors on a total of five
projects.
SSG Presentations
SSG worker members gave the equivalent of 3.95 presentations
per FTE, which corresponds to a 16.5% increase from 2007.
Presentations included:
• Sustainable Business Conference at Concordia University, where one member moderated a panel• McGill Sustainable Business Conference• Ontario Co-op Conference in Hamilton
Percentage of clients in the assessment year that have rehired or engaged SSG on another project
In 2008, 23.08% of clients rehired or engaged SSG on another
project, which is a slight increase from 22% in 2007.
Discussion and analysis
When it comes to networking and sharing strengths, ideas
and philosophy, SSG recognizes the value in conducting
presentations; worker members therefore continuously make
efforts to deliver an increasing number of presentations.
Because 2008 was a year of transition for SSG and its worker
members, no new research projects were initiated. The number
of internally collaborative projects remained the same from 2007
to 2008. A slight increase in the number of clients that rehired
SSG in 2008 was also observed.
As in previous years, meeting the 10% donations policy continues
to be a challenge for SSG. The co-op’s proactive approach
to reach the 10% donation for 2008 will consist in retroactive
allocations throughout 2009. SSG continues to work towards
improving this process.
SSG has gained sufficient expertise and experience to be able to
seek projects on our own. SSG’s efforts to partner have focused
primarily in the area of community planning in which our success
rate has been limited.
Donation Teamwork: Tides FoundationIn 2007, SSG partnered with the Social Justice Fund of the Tides Foundation for some of its charitable donations, whereby the Tides Foundation provided matching funding to some of SSGs’ donations recipients. This relationship is currently on hold as the Tides Foundation is suffering from the economic crisis and is currently not issuing any new grants. SSG will work on developing a new relationship with Tides in the future to find innovative ways to leverage their donations for greater impact.
Grassroots DonationsSSG defines “grassroots organisations” as: connected to the community they are working with and/or in; participatory and have open decision-making; address roots causes of issues; and primarily volunteer-based organisations. SSG targets initiatives where the investments will have a noticeable impact on the group and its activities; and/or where synergies with other donors for larger investments can be pursued.
SSG Worker Members donated to: 1st Quarter (January to March): “It’s said that the measure of a society is how it treats it’s most vulnerable…”
Ontario Coalition Against Poverty• Downtown Eastside Abilities Link Society• Romero House• Saint Chiara Community• Centre des Travailleurs et Travailleuses • Immigrants/Immigrant Workers Centre (CTI-IWC)
2nd Quarter (April to June): “Organizations that offer services and/or skills training in conflict management, facilitation and resolution”
Peacemakers Trust• Tri-county Restorative Justice•
SSG Associate Members donated to: Lifecycles • Storytellers Foundation• Gabriola Commons•
2005 2006 2007 2008
1. % of dollar amount of revenue to community support fund 10% 10% 10.6%, $28,335
4.05%, $11,100
2. % of project hours worked engaging more than one worker-member 0 74% 69% Internal collaboration on 15 projects, actual hours are N/A
3. % of collaborative projects with other individuals/firms 12.50% 12% 30.50% 11.54%4. Number of research projects initiated - 1 1 05. Number of SSG presentations per full-time equivalent 0.2 2.6 3 3.956. % of worker members responding that SSG's work is making a posi-tive difference
100% 100% 87.5% Not Surveyed
7. % of clients/allies responding that SSG's work is making a positive difference
70% 100% 100% Not surveyed
8. Average rate of clients and partner satisfaction - 82% 74% Not surveyed
SSGs’ objective is to provide meaningful and stable employment
for its members. While further developing the co-op and
conducting contracts, SSG continues to work towards achieving
balanced work loads. Indicators included in this section are
discussed below.
Health Care Benefits
In 2008, as in previous years, SSG members were not covered
by extended health care benefits. However, the interim health
insurance policy that came into effect in January 2007 is still in
effect; SSG therefore continues to provide a monthly contribution
of 25$ to their member’s personal well-being fund.
Percentage of hours dedicated to training, learning, advocacy,
overtime (over 40 hours per week) and volunteering
Billable hours decreased from 43% in 2007 to 35.4% in 2008.
Inversely, non-billable hours increased from 57% in 2007 to
64.55% in 2008. SSG members dedicated 3.5% of their hours
to training (understood as teaching one another), an increase
from 0.8% in 2007. The percentage of hours dedicated to
learning (understood as to include research) decreased from
7.7% in 2007 to 5.2% in 2008. Hours spent on advocacy also
slightly decreased from 0.8% in 2007 to 0.3% in 2008 and so did
overtime hours, which went from 2.7% in 2007 to 2.4% in 2008.
Finally, hours spent volunteering increased from 0% in 2007 to
0.2% in 2008, an indication that SSG’s approach to supporting
worker member volunteering is beginning to improve. Chart 4
outlines SSG’s allocations of hours.
Section Two: Toward healthy workplace, healthy lives
2005 2006 2007 2008
10. Percentage of hours dedicated to: - Training - Learning - Advocacy - Overtime (over 40 hours per week) - Volunteering
-----
1.4%7.4%---
0.8%;7.7%;0.8%;2.7%;0%
3.5%;5.2%;0.3%; 2.4%; 0.2%
11. Work-personal life balance 55% 73.3% 5 6.712. Overall worker happiness, on a scale of 1 (poor) to 10 (excellent) - 79.2% 6.5 7.913. Percent of workers with extended health benefits 0% 0% 0% 0%
1.
2.
3.
4.5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.11.
12.13.
1. Other 6. Presentations 11. Advocacy
2. Billable 7. Finances 12. Learning
3. Travel 8. Networking 13. Training
4. Communications 9. Seeking work
5. SSG Coordination 10. Overtime
1.
2.
3.
4.5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.11.
12.13.
1. Other 6. Presentations 11. Advocacy
2. Billable 7. Finances 12. Learning
3. Travel 8. Networking 13. Training
4. Communications 9. Seeking work
5. SSG Coordination 10. Overtime
Chart 4: Allocation of hours
2577.65: total # of WM billable hours
4716.6: total # of WM non-billable hours
254.5: # of hours dedicated to training
379.3: # of hours dedicated to learning
18.25: # of hours dedicated to advocacy
174.1: # of overtime hours
12.5: # of hours dedicated to volunteering
SSG: Meaningful, Stable Employment SSG is an ongoing experiment in realizing what it means to provide “meaningful, stable employment for our members.” Since we started the co-op all of our members have worked as contractors in order to allow for flexibility in work schedules and to help the co-op keep the costs and time required to deal with salary issues at a minimum. In 2008 one of our members decided to have a child, which threw our best laid plans for a bit of a loop. When people work as contractors, they don’t pay into employment insurance and are thus ineligible to claim EI - which is the source of funding for many new parents taking some leave to spend time with their babies. SSG responded to the issue of a member facing the potential for unpaid parental leave by creating a new policy: all members are eligible for taking 6 months of paid parental leave when having kids. Our first experiment with supporting parenthood was a success, with Lindsay taking 4 months of full-time leave and 4 months of half-time leave. SSG has since decided to put all members on salary so as to provide better support for our members, and a more stable work environment.
Overall worker happiness
Again on a scale of 1 to 10, SSG worker member overall
happiness rose from 6.5 in 2007 to 7.9 in 2008. Chart 6
compares the 2007 and 2008 results for each question.
Work-personal life balance
On a scale of 1 to 10, with one being poor and ten being
perfect, SSG worker members rated their overall work-life
balance at 6.7, a significant increase from 5 in 2007. Chart 5
(see below) illustrates the 2007 and 2008 scores obtained for
each question.
2
4
6
8
10
1. SSG walks the talk.
2. SSG is catalysing movement towards sustainability.
3. I am excited to go to work.
4. I feel that the whole group communicates effectively.
5. I believe I communicate well with my colleagues.
6. There is a strong sense of collaboration amongst
SSG members.
7. I feel empowered to take initiative.
8. I feel supported in dealing with new challenges.
9. My work is in line with my values.
10. My job gives me the opportunity to excel.
11. I continuously have the opportunity to learn new skills.12. SSG is a fun organisation.
1.
2. 3.
4.
5. 6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Chart 5: Work-personal life balance Chart 6: Overall worker happiness
2
4
6
8
10
1. In the past six months, work has caused me significant
stress or worry.
2. Personal pressures often interfere with my work life.
3. Work pressures often interfere with my personal life.
4. I often have to put in extra hours at work.
5. I often bring work home.
6. The organisation has a sincere interest in the well-being
of its employees.
7. This organisation actively supports work-life balance
for its members.
8. I can deal with urgent family or personal issues without
hassles or reprisals.
9. I have sufficient involvement in decisions that involve me.
10. I am able to balance life and work priorities well.
1.
2.
3.
4.5.
6.
7.
8. 9.
10.
Discussion and analysis
The decrease in billable hours from 2007 is due to 2008 being
a year of transition: as previously described, there was a
temporary decrease in worker members capable of taking on the
equivalent of a full-time workload. The general state of transition
also explains the decrease in hours dedicated to advocacy and
learning, as well as the increase in training hours.
On the other hand, the increase observed in the overall worker
happiness and work-life balance indexes, and the slight decrease
in overtime hours, is an indication that SSG’s ongoing efforts to
improve the well-being of its members are bearing fruit. SSG
continues to work towards meeting the individual needs of its
members and to be a supportive work environment.
Human Resources at SSGThe SSG Human Resources document is a living entity. It began as an attempt to initiate new members with our organization as well as to organize our at times disparate approaches. Its construction gave us the impetus to solidify our intentions, policies and internal systems, which often required some debate. It now covers the gamut, describing our balanced job complexes, diversity strategy, donations policy, pay equity and decision-making principles. More important than these details, however, is the content clarifying how SSG differs from conventional organizational structures. Our purpose, control structure and allocation of profit are strikingly different from those of traditional businesses. These elements infuse every aspect of our operations and business culture. We’re used to operating in this way and sometimes it isn’t until we task ourselves with updating a document like the HR strategy that we are consciously reminded of our most important base intentions.
Sharing Burdens and Benefits A balanced job complex is a way of organising a workplace or group that is both directly democratic and also creates relative equal empowerment among all people involved. Specifically a balanced job complex is a collection of tasks within a given workplace that is balanced for its equity and empowerment implications against all other job complexes in that workplace. It was developed as an alternative to the corporate division of labor. In order for balanced job complexes to function there can be no owners or managers involved in the workplace, as all tasks are balanced for empowerment. Each worker must undertake some unpleasant disempowering task for some time each workday or each week. All workers also share the more pleasant and empowering tasks in the workplace. In this way workers share the burdens and benefits of work that impact each person’s ability to participate in directly democratic decision making within the workplace.
As explained in Methodology, section three indicators were not
included to the 2008 SSG sustainability assessment.
Section Three: Toward diversity, equity, justice
2005 2006 2007 2008
14. Ratio of female to male to other active worker members 3:2:0 2:2:0 3:2:0 Not Included
15. Percent of worker members self-identifying as a minority 0 0 0 Not Included16. Ratio of female to male to other associate members 0 1:2:0 2:4:0 Not Included17. Percent of associate members self-identifying as a minority 0 0 83.3% no:
16.7% don't know
Not Included
2005 2006 2007 2008
14. Ratio of female to male to other active worker members 3:2:0 2:2:0 3:2:0 Not Included
15. Percent of worker members self-identifying as a minority 0 0 0 Not Included16. Ratio of female to male to other associate members 0 1:2:0 2:4:0 Not Included17. Percent of associate members self-identifying as a minority 0 0 83.3% no:
16.7% don't know
Not Included
SSG strives to nurture and embody sustainability in all aspects
of its operations, which includes measuring and working towards
reducing the co-ops ecological footprint. The trends inherent to
the indicators included in this section are detailed in Chart 7, 8
and 9 and each indicator is discussed and analyzed below.
Total square meters of new LEED and green/sustainable
building consulting projects
In an attempt to provide a measure of SSG’s positive effect
on the Canadian building industry, the co-op reports on the
square meters involved in SSG’s Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) related projects. In 2008, SSG
almost doubled the value for this indicator from 2007.
Section Four: Toward ecological sustainability
2005 2006 2007 2008
18. Total square metres of new LEED and green/sustainable building consulting projects
558,810 (total 05-06)
14,010 32,620
19. Total kilometres traveled, by mode 1. Train 5,001 13,398 13,2002. Airplane 55,594 44,208 38,3693. Bus 1,569 21,225 10,391.504. Car 4,526 3,687 3699.265. Ferry 698 1,157 762.8TOTAL 14,413 67,389 83,675 66, 422.56
20. GHG travel emissions per FTE, in kilograms (kgs) of carbon equivalents (CO2e)
1. Train 53 91 662. Airplane 6,038 3,291 2998.83. Bus 27 178 107.24. Car 168 105 123.15. Ferry 36 38 7.5TOTAL 9,759 TOTAL per FTE 2,927 6321 3,703 3,302.6
21. Percentage of GHG emissions that have been carbon taxed 0% 0% 0% 0%Chart 16, Indicator 22: Individual worker member ecological footprint in global hectares
Number of planets (2007) / hectares (2008) per person the earth can support
- 1.8 15.7
Melissa - 4.8 18.84Yuill - 3.5 36.47Geneva - 3.8gha, 2.1
planet9.32
Lindsay - 2.7 17.43Jeremy - - 18.63Rebecca - - 17.4
SWITCH SECTIONS 3 AND 4 [??]ADD GRAPHICS, REVISE TofC, etc
Total kilometers traveled, by mode of transportation
In 2008, as in previous years travel related greenhouse gas
emissions are the source of the co-op’s most damaging
ecological impacts. However, there is a positive trend since
2006; SSG worker members traveled over 66,400 km in 2008, a
decrease from over 83, 500 km in 2007 and 67, 389 km in 2006.
However, 35.5% of the 2008 kilometers were traveled on low
carbon alternatives (i.e. by train or bus), a decrease from 41%
in 2007.
Greenhouse gas emissions by mode of transportation
A total of 12.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) were
produced in 2008, a decrease from the 14.5 tonnes reported
in 2007, and 17.1 tonnes in 2006. Therefore, SSG emitted
3.3 tonnes of CO2e per full-time equivalent. The significant
differences in this reporting period are a slight increase in car
travel and a slight decrease in travel by bus, ferry, air and train.
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
4.
2.3.
1.
2006 2007 2008
1. Airplane
2. Train
3. Bus
4. Car
5. Ferry
5. 0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
2,3,4,5
1
2006 2007 2008
1. Airplane
2. Train
3. Bus
4. Car
5. Ferry
Chart 7: Total km traveled, by mode Chart 8: Total GHG emitted, by mode
Percentage of GHG emissions that have been carbon taxed
As in previous years, SSG has not carbon taxed its carbon
emissions. SSG is still working to develop a carbon emissions
strategy.
Worker members’ ecological footprint
This is the second year that SSG worker members report on
their individual ecological footprint. It has become clear, in 2008,
that there is room for improvement in terms of consistency. In
preparing this assessment, there was some confusion as to
which calculator was used in 2007 and disagreement as to
what online calculator would be most appropriate to reflect the
2008 context of worker members scattered across Canada and
Europe. After some debate, the 2008 report used the on-line
calculator available from Redefining Progress at http://www.
myfootprint.org/. In the future, SSG can improve the value of
this indicator by consistently using the same on-line calculator.
For the reasons outlined above, these 2008 results cannot be
compared accurately to the results from the 2007 reporting
period. However, when taken on their own and as seen in Chart
9, they do provide an indication of the ecological footprints related
to each worker member’s lifestyle and activities in 2008.
Discussion and analysis
Reducing the ecological footprint of its operations continues to
be a priority for SSG. For a third year in a row, ghg emissions
induced by work-related travel decreased. This positive trend is
largely due to the conscious attempt made by SSG members to
reduce-work related travel.
When it comes to their ecological footprints, SSG members are
striving to walk the talk; they seek to remain aware of the impact
of their lifestyles and will continue to report on their individual
ecological footprint.
In 2008, SSG almost doubled the total square meters of new
LEED and green/sustainable building consulting projects from
2007, which points to ongoing growth in activities related to
green/sustainable building consultation services.
SSG is still working toward developing a system to carbon tax
travel-related greenhouse gas emissions.
17.40
Rebecca
9.32
Geneva
18.63
Jeremy
17.43
Lindsay
18.84
Melissa
36.47
Yuill
Chart 9: Ecological footprint diagram
Significant transitions occurred during SSG’s fourth year of
operations. By highlighting the various challenges and positive
developments, this assessment process continues to serve as
a valuable resource for SSG. Looking forward to 2009, SSG
members are committed to work toward:
• Establishing a think tank;
• Creating hubs in the Victoria, Montreal and Vancouver
areas;
• Developing innovative relationships and strategies for
greater impact in terms of financial contribution relating
to SSG’s donation policy;
• Reducing work related travel and individual footprints;
• Initiating discussions on climate change in the
cooperative sector
Thank you for reading SSG’s fourth annual sustainability report!
Questions, comments and ideas are most welcome; please share
your feedback by writing to us at [email protected]
Conclusions
Appendix 1: Indicator Overview
Section 1: Toward cooperation, collaboration and community 2005 2006 2007 2008
1. % of dollar amount of revenue to community support fund 10% 10% 10.6%, $28,335
4.05%, $11,100
2. % of project hours worked engaging more than one worker-member
0 74% 69% Internal collaboration on 15 projects, actual hours are N/A
3. % of collaborative projects with other individuals/firms 12.50% 12% 30.50% 11.54%4. Number of research project initiated - 1 1 05. Number of SSG presentations per full-time equivalent 0.2 2.6 3 3.956. % of worker members responding that SSG's work is making a positive difference
100% 100% 87.5% Not Surveyed
7. % of clients/allies responding that SSG's work is making a posi-tive difference
70% 100% 100% Not surveyed
8. Average rate of clients and partner satisfaction - 82.1% 7.4 Not surveyed9. % of clients that rehired or engaged SSG on another project - - 22% 6 projects, 23.08%Section two: Toward healthy workplace, healthy lives 2005 2006 2007 200810. Percentage of hours to training, learning, advocacy, overtime(over 40 hours per week), volunteering
- 3.5%;5.2%;0.3%; 2.4%; 0.2%
11. Work-personal life balance 55% 73.3% 5 6.712. Overall worker happiness, on a scale of 1(poor) to 10(excellent)
- 79.2% 6.5 7.9
13. Percent of workers with extended health benefits 0% 0% 0% 0%Section three: Toward diversity, equity, justice 2005 2006 2007 200814. Ratio of female to male to other active worker members 3:2:0 2:2:0 3:2:0 Not Included15. Percent of worker members self-identifying as a minority 0 0 0 Not Included16. Ratio of female to male to other associate members 0 1:2:0 2:4:0 Not Included17. Percent of associate members self-identifying as a minority 0 0 83.3% no:
16.7% don't know
Not Included
Section four: Toward ecological sustainability 2005 2006 2007 200818. Total square metres of new LEED and green/sustainable build-ing consulting projects
558,810 (total 05-06)
14,010 32,620
19. Total kilometres traveled, by mode 1. Train 5,001 13,398 13,2002. Airplane 55,594 44,208 38,3693. Bus 1,569 21,225 10,391.504. Car 4,526 3,687 3699.265. Ferry 698 1,157 762.8TOTAL 14,413 67,389 83,675 66, 422.56
20. GHG travel emissions per FTE, in kilograms (kgs) of carbon equivalents (CO2e)
1. Train 53 91 662. Airplane 6,038 3,291 2998.83. Bus 27 178 107.2
4. Car 168 105 123.15. Ferry 36 38 7.5TOTAL 9,759 TOTAL per FTE 2,927 6321 3,703 3,302.6
21. Percentage of GHG emissions that have been carbon taxed 0% 0% 0% 0%Chart 16, Indicator 22: Individual worker member ecological foot-print in global hectares
Number of hectares per person the earth can support - 1.8 15.7Melissa - 4.8 18.84Yuill - 3.5 36.47Geneva - 3.8gha,
2.1 planet9.32
Lindsay - 2.7 17.43Jeremy - - 18.63Rebecca - - 17.4Organisational Indicators 2005 2006 2007 20081. Total numbers of project 7 30 36 262. Number of clients 3 19 23 243. Number of Associate Members 0 3 8 5Total full-time equivalents (FTE's) 0.3 2.72 3.97 3.8Financial Indicators 2005 2006 2007 20081. Total revenue $274,296.062. Total expenses $271,919.64
